Below are talking points and suggested language for your conversations and letters on HB4384.  Please use this information as you see fit.

[date]

[Representative's Name]
[Address]
[Address]
[Address]
[Address]

Dear Representative {name],

I am writing to express my concern about and opposition to House Bill 4384 which will be considered by the Juvenile Justice Reform Committee shortly.   I am specifically concerned that this bill:

1.  Does not address the issue of victim of notification for the many innocent victims who had crimes perpetrated against them by these juvenile offenders.

2.  Is not sensitive to the re-traumatization that the victims of these offenders will undergo upon being thrown into the pain and turmoil of becoming involved with proposed parole hearings and annual reviews of these inmates.

3. Creates a mechanism to put back into the public violent multiple murderers sentenced to Life Without Parole, something that can deprecate the seriousness of the original horrific offenses.

4.  Effectively creates even more Indeterminately sentenced (or C#) prisoners, a class of prisoner that many prison reform activists have been complaining about for decades and therefore takes a big step backwards in sentencing protocols now that Illinois has been operating under a determinate sentencing model for thirty years.

6.  Damages the public trust in the criminal justice system by effectively breaking what they see is a contract with the State that was entered into at sentencing for a real life sentence.

7.  Does not recognize the rights of victims as spelled out in the statutes that is intended to amend and thus is inconsistent with those statutes and abuses the rights of the victims of these offenders.

8.  Ignores already existing, much easier and less expensive methods of providing sentencing relief for those few miscarriages of justice may genuinely exist in the JWLOP system - that of Clemency and Re-sentencing in appeals courts.

I hope that you will vote "No" to HB4384 when it comes up for a vote and that you will always consider the victims of these offenders in your deliberations.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Sincerely,

[signed]

[Your name, address, and phone number]

Our letter to the members of the Juvenile Justice Reform Committee in PDF format

House Bill 1695/4384's Impossible Burden on Victims' Families

Families of murder victims whose killers were sentenced to life without parole were told that they would never have to attend a parole hearing for their loved one's killer. Victims' families were assured that once the lengthy appeals process was complete, they could be at peace in the knowledge that their loved ones' killers would never walk the streets again. They were essentially promised, therefore, that they would not have to gather evidence for a parole hearing which might occur someday. Families were led to believe that no such hearing would ever take place.

So those families didn't prepare.

They didn't take the names and contact information for the jurors, the judge, the prosecutors and the prosecution witnesses, in the event that they would need to be called as witnesses at a parole hearing someday.

They didn't order a transcript of the proceedings so that in the event the court reporter and his or her notes couldn't be found years later, the transcript would reflect what happened at sentencing.

Families of murder victims didn't preserve on videotape or in writing victim impact statements from family members and others traumatized by the murder, in the event that those witnesses were dead or otherwise unavailable for a parole hearing at a future date.

They didn't save recordings of television or radio news reports about the killings.

They didn't preserve certain physical evidence about the victim or the murder that would help them someday in an effort to oppose the killer's release.

They didn't insist that even in mandatory sentences of life without parole, the judge state his or her reasons for imposing the sentence and the victims' family be allowed to present victim impact statements in court on the record.

They didn't interview neighbors, classmates, work colleagues or other acquaintances of the killer to preserve their recollections.

They didn't seek to obtain information about the killer such as school records, medical or psychiatric records or juvenile criminal history, including referrals or diversions to non-judicial forums such as peer review programs.

They didn't keep records of things families had to undergo such as counseling sessions or doctor's appointments to deal with the trauma inflicted on them.

Now, after many years have passed, and the ability to obtain this evidence is gone or seriously compromised, HB 1695 proposes a bait and switch. HB 1695 tells those families, you will have to prepare for a parole hearing. The killer can, after 20 years, try EVERY YEAR to get out. And you will have to attend a parole hearing if you want to oppose the killer's release.

What will those families do?

I'll tell you what I did: I tried to find the prosecutors. All of them had left the State's Attorney's office. Only because I am a criminal lawyer did I know how to track them down. I tried to find the jurors. The court file has no record of who they were; they therefore cannot be found, 17 years after the date of trial. I tried to order the transcript of sentencing: the court reporter, and therefore the court reporter's notes, cannot be found. I would have wanted the testimony of my father, Lee Bishop, who endured the agony of being the first to come upon the crime scene and find my pregnant sister and her husband frozen in death. My father is dead. His recollections died with him because they have not been recorded.

The principal of the killer's school no longer works there; ditto many of his teachers. The killer and his family no longer live in the house they did at the time of the killing. I assume that friends and neighbors have moved away as well. Most of my sister's belongings have been given away. Memories have faded over time.

Many victims' families were not allowed to give victim impact statements at the time of sentencing, and the judge gave no detailed explanation for the sentence and why it was justified, because the sentence may have been mandatory.

The stench of unfairness is overpowering.

It should put to shame this bill's proponents who contend that, now that many years have passed, offenders should get a "do-over" while at the same time victims' families have not even been notified that this bill is under consideration.

This is not the way to do justice.